Technologies that target Human Frailties And Functions during CIA Martial Law

[Anti_Illuminati]

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/law/nonlet2.pdf

Sorry kind of at a loss for words over this, read the 1st 2-3 pages and skim over the rest (but you will probably be attracted like a magnet to it to find out wtf they are talking about) and you will see what I mean.

EDIT:  Read the footnotes, esp the one talking about carbon fibers in the beginning.

[sociostudent]

So, their weapons won't KILL you, they'll just make you WISH you were dead?

[Danis]

I remember during the Nato strike on Serbia back in 1999 they showed images of carbon fibre strands littered all over power cables.

Edit: Black Out Bomb

[rawiron1]

Could that be chaff?

Jason

[Anti_Illuminati]

I remember during the Nato strike on Serbia back in 1999 they showed images of carbon fibre strands littered all over power cables.

Edit: Black Out Bomb

That deserves a full post (wouldn't surprise me if they use that in the US):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2865323.stm
Fact file: Blackout bombs


In 1991 the US Navy used a warhead it had developed for the Tomahawk cruise missile to black out power supplies over much of Iraq.

These so-called Kit-2 warheads - whose use was only revealed a year later - unwound reels of carbon fibre which short-circuited electrical equipment.

The US Air Force is then said to have been spurred into developing its own version of the "blackout bomb".

Stealth fighters dropped these on Serbia during Nato's military action over Kosovo in 1999.

Canisters found on the ground were labelled BLU-114/B (BLU being a standard military acronym for "bomb live unit").

The fact that they had not been used until the sixth week of the air campaign raised suspicions that they were somewhat experimental.

Pentagon spokesman Ken Bacon said at the time: "We have certain weapons we do not believe it is appropriate to talk about - and this is one of them.

He added: "It is highly classified, and it's not a weapon we choose to discuss publicly."

'Light switch'

One of the weapon's main effects is psychological.

The then Nato spokesman, Jamie Shea, said: "The fact that the lights went out across 70% of the country shows that Nato has its finger on the light switch in Yugoslavia.

"We can turn the power off whenever we need to and whenever we want to."

The BLU-114/B is a form of cluster bomb. That is, it scatters numerous "sub-munitions" in the form of canisters about the size of a drinks can.

These in turn sprinkle highly conductive strands of carbon fibre, said to be finer than those used in the Gulf War Tomahawks.

The chances are that such graphite bombs could be used again in Iraq, 2003.

[Satyagraha]

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/law/nonlet2.pdf

Sorry kind of at a loss for words over this, read the 1st 2-3 pages and skim over the rest (but you will probably be attracted like a magnet to it to find out wtf they are talking about) and you will see what I mean.

EDIT:  Read the footnotes, esp the one talking about carbon fibers in the beginning.

Lots of toys for sociopaths in this doc... start with this list from pg. 14. It helps to remind yourself that all of these weapons can and will be used against Americans here at home:

Technologies That Attack Or Enhance
Material Systems And Infrastructure:


• Acoustic (Acoustic bullets that cause resonant oscillations in physical
structures)47

• Battlespace Affectors (potential replacement for conventional lethal
landmine)48???

• Biodeterioration (micro-organisms which attack specific materials)49

• Caltrops (metal jacks used to puncture tires on motor vehicles)50

• Combustion Modifiers and Fuel Viscosifiers (chemical additives which
change fuel characteristics)51

• Combustible Dispersants (substances which burst into flame or explode
when contact with the treated surface is made by motor vehicles or
personnel)52

• Computer Viruses (to cause the malfunction of automatic data processing
systems)53

• Concentrated Electromagnetic Pulse (a non-nuclear generated pulse
disrupting electronic equipment including motor vehicles with electronic
ignitions)54

• Conductive Ribbons (carbon fibers used to cause electrical disruptions and
short out power grids)55

• Defoliants (remove vegetation that could be used for concealment)56 (Didn't we have enough Agent Orange??)

• Depolymerizers (polymers that dissolve adhesives)57

• Electronic and Optical Jamming (electronic warfare devices)

• Filter Clogging Materials (airborne materials designed to clog the air
filters of combustion engines)58

• High Power Microwave Fields (pulsed microwave beams to destroy
electronics)59

• Lasers Systems (targeting and guidance systems that detect, determine
range, track, and guide, as well as, systems that blind or destroy enemy
optical sensors)

• Liquid Metal Embrittlement (to cause treated metal to crumble and
disintegrate)60

• Motor Vehicle Electrical Arrestors (an electrical charge is directed at a
motor vehicle as it passes which causes it to stop)61

• Motor Vehicle Obscurants (opaque covering to block windows and sensor
lens)62

• Motor Vehicle Taggers (a projectile delivered transmitter tag with polymer
adhesive to allow a vehicle to be tracked)63

• Soil Destabilizers (changes soil properties reducing traction for motor
vehicles)64

• Super Adhesives (used to prevent movement by motor vehicles and
personnel)65

• Supercaustics or Super Corrosives (dissolve most metals, plastics, rubber,
polymers, and glass)66

• Superlubricants (chemicals which make surfaces extremely slippery)67

• Weather Modification (such as inducing rainfall by the chemical seeding of
clouds)68

[Satyagraha]

Surveillance Or Security

Collection and Decipherment of Scrambled Communication (decoding of
sophisticated electronic communications)69 (pg. 18)

· Computer Moles/Worms (computer programs designed to penetrate into
enemy automatic data processing systems and report back specific datum)70

· Electronic Smart Dust (microelectromechanical airborne particles that
relay reconnaissance information)71

· Ground Penetrating Radar (system designed to detect subsurface manmade
structures)72

· Robotic Land Probes (systems capable of gathering and relaying
information of surface activity)

· Seeing Through Walls (radar and acoustic systems that provide images of
what is located behind walls)73

-- Nonimaging Portable Radar (portable acoustic system designed to detect
motion behind nonmetallic walls)74

· Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) (used to gather information of surface
activity from the air through cameras, infrared sensors, radars,
microprocessors and transmitters)75

[Satyagraha]

Technologies That Attack Or Enhance
Human Frailties And Functions

This primary category consists of those non-lethal technologies that
are capable of attacking or enhancing human frailties and functions. It is by far
the largest of the three primary categories. Some of the missions where the
capability represented by these non-lethal weapons may be very useful are: riot
control (civil disturbances); public safety; assistance to law enforcement (siege
or dynamic entry); curfew enforcement; hostage release; isolation of insurgents;
counter-ambush; ambush; denial of enemy base areas; facility denial; escape
and evasion; and psychological. Many of the non-lethal technologies that fall
into this category were initially developed for use by law enforcement
personnel. Non-lethal technologies available or under research that exhibit the
capability to attack or enhance human frailties and functions under this
category would include:

Acoustic Pulses (high-frequency sound pulses designed to cause bluntobject
trauma)76

· Claymore Mine With Blunt Object Projectiles (kinetic system designed for
crowd control and security that propels blunt impact objects such as sting
balls)77

· Counter Sniper Systems (electronic systems which allow pinpointing of a
sniper and return fire within 2 seconds)78

· Curdler Unit (a system designed to produce a very loud shrill noise which
is used to irritate and disperse rioters)79

· Dazzling Lasers (lasers designed to cause temporary blindness from 12-24
hours)

Deference Tones (systems used to project a voice or sound to another
location)80

· Disinformation Campaigns (techniques designed to influence or persuade
groups against their interest)81

· Electrical Water Stream (systems using charged water stream to
immobilize or stop an adversary)82

· Entangling Nets (sticky nets and high voltage nets fired from a 40 MM
grenade launcher to stop or subdue a fleeing or disorderly individual)83

· Foaming Agents (designed to impair mobility and vision)84

· Grenade Launched Projectiles (same rounds below may be delivered by
hand thrown means)

--Multiple Baton Wood Round (used to create forced entry diversions)85
--Multiple Foam Rubber Round (used to stun or knock down an
adversary)86
--Stinger Round (round containing multiple rubber balls used to stun or
knock down an adversary)87

· Holographic Projections (used for misinformation campaigns)88

· Incapacitating or Calmative Agents (biomedical agents that may be
absorbed through the skin or delivered by airborne means designed to
incapacitate)89

· Infrasound (low-frequency sound designed to cause disorientation and
physical discomfort)90

· Laser Protection (system designed to protect against lasers by blocking the
wavelength, reflecting through optical coatings or absorbed using dyes)91

· Markers (systems designed to identify personnel through some
form of marking)92

· Mind Control (subliminal visual and audio messages)93

· Obscurants (systems designed to disorient and to obscure observation)94

· Odoriferous Agents (non-toxic systems designed to create extremely
unpleasant odors)95

· Optical Munitions (flash systems designed to temporarily blind or
disorient)96

· Photic Driver (a system designed for crowd control which uses ultrasound
and flashing infrared lights to penetrate closed eyelids) 97

· 12 Gauge Shotgun Shell Projectiles
-- Bean Bags (nylon bean bags designed to stun or knock down an
adversary)98
-- Hardwood batons (wooden projectiles used to stun or knock down
adversary)99
-- Rubber Pellets (rubber pellets fired at high velocity to stun or knock
down an adversary)100

· Riot Control Agents
-- Chlorobenzylidenemalonitrile (CS) gas (used to cause disorientation and
crowd control)101

-- Oleoresin Capsaicin (OC) (a naturally occurring inflammatory found in
cayenne pepper used to cause disorientation and crowd control)102

Rubber Bullets (rubber projectiles designed to inflict pain without
penetrating)103

· Sponge Grenade Round (40 MM foam round used to stun or knock down
an adversary)104

· Stun Guns (systems that use electric shock to stun and immobilize)105

· Voice Synthesis/Morphing (system designed to produce the voice and
image of an adversary used to deceive or gain access)106

· Vomiting Agents (agents designed to cause nausea and vomiting by
personnel)107

· Ultrasound (an acoustic system using high frequency sound whose
wavelength is outside the audible band)108

· Water Cannon (system designed to produce a stream of water under very
high pressure for crowd or riot control)109

[sociostudent]

Lots of toys for sociopaths in this doc... start with this list from pg. 14. It helps to remind yourself that all of these weapons can and will be used against Americans here at home:

Technologies That Attack Or Enhance
Material Systems And Infrastructure:


• Acoustic (Acoustic bullets that cause resonant oscillations in physical
structures)47

• Battlespace Affectors (potential replacement for conventional lethal
landmine)48??? (HOLY CRAP)

• Biodeterioration (micro-organisms which attack specific materials)49

• Caltrops (metal jacks used to puncture tires on motor vehicles)50

• Combustion Modifiers and Fuel Viscosifiers (chemical additives which
change fuel characteristics)51

• Combustible Dispersants (substances which burst into flame or explode
when contact with the treated surface is made by motor vehicles or
personnel)52

• Computer Viruses (to cause the malfunction of automatic data processing
systems)53

• Concentrated Electromagnetic Pulse (a non-nuclear generated pulse
disrupting electronic equipment including motor vehicles with electronic
ignitions)54

• Conductive Ribbons (carbon fibers used to cause electrical disruptions and
short out power grids)55

• Defoliants (remove vegetation that could be used for concealment)56 (Didn't we have enough Agent Orange??)

• Depolymerizers (polymers that dissolve adhesives)57

• Electronic and Optical Jamming (electronic warfare devices)

• Filter Clogging Materials (airborne materials designed to clog the air
filters of combustion engines)58



• High Power Microwave Fields (pulsed microwave beams to destroy
electronics)59

• Lasers Systems (targeting and guidance systems that detect, determine
range, track, and guide, as well as, systems that blind or destroy enemy
optical sensors)

• Liquid Metal Embrittlement (to cause treated metal to crumble and
disintegrate)60

• Motor Vehicle Electrical Arrestors (an electrical charge is directed at a
motor vehicle as it passes which causes it to stop)61

• Motor Vehicle Obscurants (opaque covering to block windows and sensor
lens)62

• Motor Vehicle Taggers (a projectile delivered transmitter tag with polymer
adhesive to allow a vehicle to be tracked)63

• Soil Destabilizers (changes soil properties reducing traction for motor
vehicles)64

• Super Adhesives (used to prevent movement by motor vehicles and
personnel)65

• Supercaustics or Super Corrosives (dissolve most metals, plastics, rubber,
polymers, and glass)66

• Superlubricants (chemicals which make surfaces extremely slippery)67

• Weather Modification (such as inducing rainfall by the chemical seeding of
clouds)68

Yeah, we're in for a lot of "fun", alright.  

[Satyagraha]

Yeah, we're in for a lot of "fun", alright.  

These are some extremely sick f*cks.

[Satyagraha]

Just How Does One Select
the Perfect Non_Lethal Weapon for the Job???

III. Selecting Non-Lethal Weapon Systems

In today’s military, there is always pressure to do things faster, but as experienced commanders know, it inevitably takes time to reach sound conclusions on important matters. When the issue involves what non-lethal weapons systems to take on an operation, the commander must be prepared to deal with a very time consuming selection process to determine the particular
system to employ.

A. Determining the Capability Needed

As illustrated by the actions taken by General Zinni and his staff during Operation United Shield, the selection and acquisition of non-lethal weapon systems can be difficult. The starting point for any commander is to determine the specific capabilities that are necessary to accomplish the expressed and implied taskings contained within the mission. Because these
taskings may call for several different capabilities, the commander may require multiple non-lethal weapon systems.

When determining the non-lethal capabilities needed, the commander should also look at both positive and negative oriented capabilities for each of the primary categories. This means that commanders should be as concerned about finding non-lethal capabilities that would enhance or improve the effectiveness of their personnel as they are about finding capabilities that will
stymie the adversary’s personnel.

As an example of positive capabilities for operations in non-English speaking countries, the commander might look for non-lethal technology that would provide translation aid to assigned personnel or for increased force protection and life-saving through a non-lethal technology that warns force personnel of danger by identifying approaching individuals who are carrying concealed weapons or explosives.110


B. Knowledge of Systems Available
Next, the commander must become familiar with the non-lethal weapon systems in the U.S. inventory, as well as, the non-lethal technology currently being used in the civilian community. A solid working knowledge of the non-lethal technologies available is essential to the commander’s selection process. At first blush, this appears to be an overwhelming task; the critical
elements for the commander are the expenditure of valuable time and personnel assets to develop the requisite knowledge. In addition to these issues,
another stumbling block to the commander involves the cloak of secrecy
that usually surrounds new non-lethal weapon systems.  Since most commanders are unaware
of even the unclassified non-lethal systems, adding a cloak of secrecy erects another artificial barrier which must be overcome.

The classification of emerging technology is the military’s response to the fear that if a new system becomes widely known, hostile forces will develop countermeasures or will copy the system for use against U.S. forces. Because of this, the commander
may be unaware of systems that are highly classified.
Currently, the U.S. weapons inventory has only a modest non-lethal capability (!!!)...  Many of the more exotic capabilities are still five years or more away from being approved for use.111.

For Operation United Shield, the I MEF staff faced the same time constraints, manpower constraints and secrecy problems in determining which non-lethal weapon systems were to be selected.112  The magnitude of the effort required to obtain the necessary knowledge and information exposed the seriousness of this problem.
Since there was no Department of Defense office responsible for the compilation or dissemination of information concerning non-lethal technology, General Zinni’s staff was forced to seek information from a variety of military and civilian sources as well as ongoing research
projects.[/color]

For future commanders, Operation United Shield highlighted the issue of where does the commander, faced with a time sensitive operation, obtain the knowledge necessary to select and acquire suitable non-lethal weapons?

The Marine Corps, as the executive agent for the Department of Defense Non-Lethal Weapons Program, has made tremendous strides toward streamlining the selection and acquisition process through the establishment of the JNLWD. As the JNLWD develops its niche, it hopes to become the central clearing house for compiling and disseminating information on non-lethal technologies.113  The Directorate has been made more accessible to commanders and their staffs through a Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Program
Website with a comprehensive non-lethal weapon systems database.114 

Furthermore, the Marine Corps has negotiated a Memorandum of Agreement with the other military services and the United States Special Operations Command to use the JNLWD to coordinate the implementation of non-lethal weapons programs. Under this Memorandum, the JNLWD’s oversight only focuses on programs at the tactical level and does not extend to those service
programs whose goal is to achieve a wider (theater/strategic level) military objective.115 During the Joint Non-lethal Weapons Standing Rules of Engagement Development Conference on January 7, 1998, the Director of the JNLWD indicated a new initiative was being sponsored by the JNLWD to modify this Memorandum of Agreement.116 The proposed modification would allow oversight of all non-lethal weapons programs at the strategic as well as the tactical level. This Memorandum of Agreement also establishes the
procedures required in Public Law 104-106, Section 219 - “Nonlethal Weapons Study” by making the Commandant of the Marine Corps, in conjunction with the other military services, Department of Defense agencies and the Unified CINCs, the primary conduit for reviewing, coordinating, and integrating new non-lethal weapons programs and making recommendations on those programs
to the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition and Technology).117


C. Other Selection Factors

Once the desired capabilities have been determined and the availability of the systems which can provide those capabilities have been ascertained, other factors to be considered in the selection process are training, logistical support (mobility), quantity and spare parts requirements, combat load, environmental limitations, characteristics of the system, and cost.

The training required for the use of some non-lethal weapon systems is not only difficult and expensive, but also very time consuming. For this reason, it may be important to know whether the training for the system is compatible with or complements the training the unit has scheduled for the traditional lethal weapon systems.118

In addition, to evaluate the full impact of the training, the commander may need to know whether or not a special land based training facility will be required. If such a training facility is needed, additional time and money would need to be set aside to meet this requirement since this training could not be accomplished during normal transit (either by ship or by air) to the area of
operation.119

Similarly, logistical support for the non-lethal weapon system selected is important. In simple terms, the commander must consider the system’s mobility. For most operations, commanders will have a limited amount of aircraft lift and ship’s cargo space available to move their units and equipment into the area of operation. Due to these space constraints, the size of the nonlethal
logistical footprint becomes crucial. To further complicate the space constraint issue, there is normally no one who has had prior experience with moving that particular system, handling the size of the system (to include the number of individual systems needed by the unit along with their spare parts), and managing the special transportation restrictions.120 For example, the commander of a Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) might have to decide whether to leave behind an artillery piece from its normal combat table of
equipment (T/E) in order to accommodate the space needed to support a nonlethal weapon system.

The importance of selecting a non-lethal weapon system which has adequate or sufficient spare parts cannot be overstated. No weapon system should ever be fielded without the necessary means to replace or repair those parts subject to malfunction or breakage. For non-lethal weapon systems, this type of information will have greater significance if the manufacturer has a
limited number of spare parts in stock and the manufacturing process for the spare parts is a lengthy or costly process.121

Another important element to be considered for ground forces during the selection process is the combat load. Combat load refers to the required items each military member of the ground force must carry for the operation. Included in most combat loads are such items as a pistol or rifle, ammunition, helmet, flak jacket, gas mask, poncho, sleeping bag, water, food, first aid items,
maps, compass, bayonet, pocket knife, lighter, field coat and additional clothing. These items are normally carried within an Alice pack or on an hharness or a war belt. If the non-lethal weapon selected would require each Soldier or Marine to carry a substantial increase in volume or weight, it could affect unit maneuverability and foot speed.

Some non-lethal weapons are more effective than others in certain types of terrain, environments or weather conditions. If these limitations exist, the commander needs to be aware of them. During the selection process, the commander should concentrate on those systems that work best in the expected combat environment for that operation. In addition, the commander needs
information about the durability of each system (including components) that may be selected. The selection process should exclude those systems which are not reliable under austere conditions or have historical track records indicating frequent malfunction or breakage.122

Those non-lethal weapon systems that require a relatively sterile environment to function should ordinarily not be selected.
The characteristics of the non-lethal weapon systems being considered for selection are also critical. The commander needs detailed information on the following traits for each system under consideration: nature and duration of effect, delivery system requirements, “standoff” capability,123 area of coverage, range, weight, interoperability with other lethal and non-lethal weapons,
manpower requirements, and maneuverability. Without this information, the commander is making the selection in the dark. A comparison of these traits for multiple systems which offer almost the same capability gives the commander a valuable decision making tool. ...

[Satyagraha]

Employing Non-lethal Weapon Systems

Because non-lethal weapon systems have broad application across the
entire spectrum of conflict, they may be used for all military operations and
will, without doubt, contribute to success in future armed conflicts. During
armed conflict, battlefields may be shaped through operations which employ
non-lethal weapons. Non-lethal weapons may be used in tactical targeting to
fight the close battle; in strategic targeting to fight the deep battle; in an urban
environment where lethal indirect fire weapons may be impractical; as a force
multiplier for rear area security by enhancing barriers to bases, supply depots,
and other command locations; and as a tool to manage and control EPWs,
civilian internees, and refugees.

With the demise of the former Soviet Union, the likelihood of a global
war has diminished substantially.

Now, the most likely use of a non-lethal weapon system
will come during a military operation other than war (MOOTW).152

One must remember a MOOTW is not always conducted under
peaceful circumstances. World hot spots resulting from cultural or
ethnic unrest, armed insurgencies, religious disputes, and unstable political
leadership often precipitate a MOOTW.

Frequently, the most difficult aspect of a MOOTW is to provide humanitarian assistance and
protection to the omnipresent civilians in volatile and unpredictable surroundings. When lethal
force instead of non-lethal force is used by those who have come in the name of “humanity,”
the complexion of the situation changes. The forces providing aid may no longer be viewed
as friends and allies but instead as oppressors and aggressors. Without non-lethal weapons
to expand the options available on the low side of the use of force continuum, the commander
faces the dilemma of doing nothing or using lethal force. Non-lethal weapons may be used to fill the
gap between diplomatic pressure, economic sanctions or a military show of force and the use of lethal force.

For the United States, a MOOTW has become a common means of responding to a world crisis.

For example, when Libya confronted the United States indirectly in the Gulf of Sidra,153
the United States responded through a type of MOOTW known as a “freedom of navigation
operation.” MOOTWs have been used to respond to a loss of government control and internal violence
through “noncombatant evacuation operations.”154 The U.S. military is currently conducting a type
of MOOTW known as a “peace enforcement operation” in the former Yugoslavia.155

In addition, the U.S. military has conducted MOOTWs to provide humanitarian assistance in response to
domestic and foreign disasters156 and to restore democracy (<--- that's a joke, right??).157

Although the employment of non-lethal weapon systems may be
similar from one operation to the next, certain key elements within the process
will change based on the mission and the threat level. The most important of
these elements, the tactics for utilizing non-lethal weapons and the rules of
engagement (ROE), are closely entwined with the expressed and implied
taskings of the mission and the political policy upon which the mission is
grounded. There are two potential problems that could have a tremendous
impact upon the tactics for employing non-lethal weapons and the ROE.

The first is “mission creep,”158 and the second is a change to the threat level. If
there is a change to the mission (through mission creep or otherwise) or to the
threat level, a totally different operation may result. Faced with a change to the
mission or to the threat level, a commander must go back to the drawing board
to determine whether modifications are needed to the make-up of the military
force, to the lethal and non-lethal weapon systems selected (to include
reviewing the tactical plan for employing weapon systems) and to the ROE for
mission accomplishment.


=============================================

152 A military operation other than war (MOOTW) is also frequently referred to as an operation other
than war (OOTW). The term MOOTW has been defined as encompassing different types of activities
to include peace type operations, as well as a wide range of non-traditional operations “where the
military instrument of national power is used for purposes other than the large-scale combat operations
usually associated with war.” JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF, JOINT PUB. 3-0, DOCTRINE FOR JOINT
OPERATIONS V-1 (FEBRUARY 1, 1995). Joint Doctrine sets forth 16 different types of MOOTWs:
Support to Insurgency, Strikes and Raids, Show of Force Operations, Recovery Operations, Protection
of Shipping, Peace Operations, Noncombatant Evacuation Operations, Nation Assistance or Support to
Counterinsurgency, Military Support to Civil Authorities, Humanitarian Assistance, Ensuring Freedom
of Navigation and Overflight, Enforcing Exclusion Zones, Enforcement of Sanction/Maritime Intercept
Operations, DoD Support to Counterdrug Operations, Combating Terrorism, and Arms Control. JOINT
CHIEFS OF STAFF , JOINT PUB. 3-07, JOINT DOCTRINE FOR MILITARY OPERATIONS OTHER THAN WAR
III-1 (JUNE 16, 1995). The U.S. Army definition for an OOTW is found in U.S. DEP’T ARMY, FIELD
MANUAL 100-5, Operations 2-0 (June 1993). In the following quote, General Charles C. Krulak,
Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps, implies that MOOTWs are the most likely type of conflict on
the horizon: “Future war is most likely not the son of Desert Storm; rather it will be the stepchild of
1998 A Primer on the Employment of Non-lethal Weapons
 Somalia and Chechnya.” Robert Holzer, Krulak Warns of Overreliance on Technology, Defense
News, October 7-13, 1996 at 4, 32.

153 This confrontation between the United States and Libya occurred as the result of Libya’s claim to the
Gulf of Sidra as “historic waters.” The United States asserted that Libya’s claim violated international
law and documented this objection by diplomatic protest and by conducting a number of naval exercises
(freedom of navigation operations) in the Gulf of Sidra. Mark J. Valencia, Law of the Sea in
Transition: Navigation Nightmare for the Maritime Powers?, 18 J. Mar. L. & Com. 541 (October
1987).

154 For an excellent discussion of the legal underpinning for a noncombatant evacuation operation see
Major Steven F. Day, Legal Considerations in Noncombatant Evacuation Operations, 40 Naval Law
Review 45 (1992).

155 U. S. military forces are serving in the NATO controlled “Stabilization Force” (SFOR) formerly
known as the “Implementation Force” (IFOR) currently being used in the former Yugoslavia. This
ongoing military operation is a Chapter VII peace enforcement operation that was mandated by the
United Nations in 1995. S.C. Res. 1031 (Dec. 15, 1995), U.N. Doc. S/RES/1031 (1995). For a
comprehensive article on the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia see The Balkan Survey, The
Economist, January 24, 1998 at 54-55. The general framework for peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina is
set forth in the Dayton Peace Accords and the Annexes thereto. See U.N. Doc. S1995/999, Annex. For
more information on the United Nations involvement in the former Yugoslavia see S.C. Res. 743 (Feb.
21, 1992), U.N. Doc. S/RES/743 (1992); S.C. Res. 757 (May 30, 1992), U.N. Doc. S/RES/757
(1992); and S.C. Res. 836 (June 4, 1993), U.N. Doc. S/RES/836 (1993).

156 Operation Sea Angel was a foreign disaster relief operation conducted by the United States after a
typhoon struck the coast of Bangladesh in May of 1991. See Memorandum of Understanding Between

[Anti_Illuminati]

http://www.allthingspass.com/uploads/html-142Out%20Of%20The%20Blue%20Rev%20Aug_06.htm

http://mindcontrol101.blogspot.com/2008_12_01_archive.html

[Dig]

Now, the most likely use of a non-lethal weapon system
will come during a military operation other than war

[Satyagraha]

Here's EBO "Attrition" in action: they call these "non-lethal" weapons, but that's a problem they are concerned about... will they be able to 'control' people well enough with non-lethal weapons?  No.... they will have a setting available (by mistake, of course); that will make a 'non-lethal' weapon absolutely LETHAL. The 'non-lethal' name is a psyop. They're all lethal if you know how to set the dials...

Sound Cannon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnhUX78_YuU
For those that don't understand the possible application of this weapon, consider what, in fact, SOUND actually is:

Vibrations in the Air.

Picture this:
-Infantry with exploded ear drums on the ground having seizures from massive over-stimulation of all audio and tacile nerve receivers
-Tank crews killed by being "shaken to death" inside their own vehicles while their ammuntion is detonated by massive vibrations
-Airplanes forced to the ground by "artificial turbulence"

[jeremystalked1]

Let's not forget the psychotronics, which I have personal experience with.  They use it overtly on people like me because we've been discredited, and so we're safe for experimentation.

I know a lot of people on this forum don't take such claims seriously, but remember that there is a classified technology adoption timeline.  The stuff the military is boasting about now was deployed by the Intelligence agencies decades ago.

[Satyagraha]

Semi-Lethal ( is that like being semi-pregnant???)

Israel Developing Semi-Lethal Sonic Cannon To Control Rioters
http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2010-01/israeli-sonic-cannon-control-rioters-scare-birds
Posted 01.19.2010 at 11:48 am


A desert people have developed a new weapon that uses sound instead of bullets. But this time, it will be used to control crowds instead of fighting giant worms or devious members of House Harkonnen. The Israeli Defense Ministry has contracted for the production of sonic-boom stun-guns called "Thunder Generator cannons," which they hope to use in crowd-control situations.

The cannons are built by farming company PDT Agro, which originally designed the sound blasters as a means of warding birds away from crops. Eventually, someone realized the powerful sonic blasts could do the same to people.

The weapon runs on LPG, a common cooking gas, which mixes with oxygen to generate powerful bursts of sound. Each sound burst lasts around 300 milliseconds, and generates a shockwave that travels from the cannon at almost six times the speed of sound.

Although it's intended to be less than lethal, the Thunder Generator cannon can cause death to people within 30 feet of the blast. For people farther away than 30 feet, the sonic boom will deafen them and knock them back, and hopefully disperse an unruly crowd.

The Israeli military hopes to use the sound blaster as an alternative to the rubber bullets and caustic chemicals they currently deploy against rioting Orthodox settlers and rock-throwing Palestinians alike. Either way, it sounds less dangerous than a weirding module.